All Episodes
March 22, 2018 - Health Ranger - Mike Adams
15:21
Jonathan Emord Raw Milk freedom speech in Washington D.C.
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
We're going to talk about great food and access to fresh, unprocessed milk, and I have some fantastic speakers to introduce you to.
Our first one is Jonathan Emord, who is an attorney who has successfully defeated the FDA in court eight times.
One of our true heroes.
And he's going to talk a little bit about what that looks like and what it's going to look like for us and for our access to fresh, unprocessed milk from farmers we love and trust.
Jonathan?
Thank you very much for inviting me to speak today.
You know, if you look at the Capitol Dome over here, you'll see the Statue of Freedom.
That's on the very top of the Capitol.
It is the pinnacle of the Capitol, and it is supposed to epitomize what this great nation is all about.
That is that this government would value liberty and would not take from individuals the rights to life, liberty, and property without due process of law.
It is also important for us to recognize that that statue, 19 and a half foot tall statue up there, is armed with a sword and shield that symbolizes the defense of liberty.
And it symbolizes the people's commitment to the founding principles articulated in our Declaration of Independence.
And that is that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with unalienable rights to life, liberty, and property, and that just governments are instituted among men to protect the rights of the governed.
Well, we assemble here today precisely because the rights of an individual have been violated based on majoritarian principles that have been adopted by the Food and Drug Administration against a minority that is doing nothing to cause injury to anyone else.
In this case, Dan produces a safe product.
He has healthy cows.
He makes sure that the product is safe.
He refrigerates it.
He delivers it to people who've consumed it, not only in his community, his Amish community, safely for decades, but also elsewhere in the country.
But despite the fact that there is no actual proof that anyone has ever been injured, Buy milk from Dan's cows.
He is being treated as if he were a drug lord by our federal government.
He is being treated as if what he sells is contraband that will cause injury to anyone who gets near the substance.
And this is fresh milk.
Now, if the government had a point here, that is, if Dan sold something that injured someone, I certainly wouldn't be up here, and I doubt you would be here either.
But the fact of the matter is he's selling something that is being safely consumed.
So why interfere with the freedom of choice of those consumers when what they are consuming is not causing them injury?
I defy the FDA to show a single instance in which Dan's milk has caused injury to anyone.
Now, what we have here in the case of Dan is a rather interesting story, and I will relate it to you, because it's outrageous that the government would take an Amish farmer and treat him as if he were a part of the Medellin drug cartel.
But that's what they've done here.
They put him under investigation for a year.
A clandestine, undisclosed investigation of his farm and his practices.
What they hope to find other than cows being milked I don't know, but actually it was cows being milked that they were interested in.
You see, Dan Algier, an Amish farmer from Kinzers, Pennsylvania, has become an enemy of the state.
Not because he is a violent man, not because he performs acts that threaten the lives or liberties of other people or their property, not because he is involved in some plot to overthrow the government, but because he dared to sell unpasteurized milk.
On April 20th, 2010, before sunup, two black SUVs with tinted windows meandered up Dan's dirt pathway, his road, to his farm.
Dan was milking cows at the time.
He came out, he noticed that there was something strange because here these black SUVs are coming up without their lights on and it's not sunup.
So he knew something.
Was definitely up.
He's not accustomed to seeing SUVs, black SUVs, in his Amish community.
So there he is, watching, tending to his cows, but he's a non-violent man.
He didn't resort to any measure of self-defense.
He simply continued with his chores.
And then all of a sudden, a federal agent approaches him, and he turns to see the person, and the question is, where do you keep the milk?
And that brave atrocity of having raw milk It was why they sent these federal agents onto his property, why they expended tens of thousands of taxpayers' dollars on a clandestine investigation,
why they purchased from a safe house in Maryland 23 units of milk from Dan and had him transported across state lines to Maryland to deliver it, refrigerate it, to make sure that the customer would be safe.
And unbeknownst to him, that customer It was a fraud.
It was agents of the federal government in trying to entrap him in the sale of unpasteurized milk in interstate commerce.
Well, they inspected Dan's coolers and they looked at all the milk.
Aha, there it was, the contraband they were looking for, the fresh raw milk.
And now Dan is in federal court, continues to be viewed as an enemy of the state, this Amish farmer, this yeoman farmer not unlike those who founded this country, who themselves consumed raw milk.
Raw milk has been consumed for over 2,000 years by man.
And, you know, it's rather difficult to distinguish raw milk from such products as sushi, chicken, poultry products.
Raw oysters.
The question that we have to focus on in the case of foods when we have an intelligent government, not a knee-jerk government, is on the safety of the food as it is supplied to the consumer.
There's no objection to testing the milk to make sure it's safe.
There's no objection to protocols to ensure that the milk is made in a safe way.
Or that the animals are clean and free of tuberculosis or any other disease.
There's no objection to that.
Everyone here who believes in raw milk endorses that and would only consume a safe milk product for themselves and their families.
And so we have a situation where it's not a question of whether the government can ensure the safety of milk.
It's a question of whether the government can protect the large dairy farmers, the large institutionalized corporate dairy, from competition arising from this burgeoning movement in this country for organic products, for food that is safe, yet made in a natural way.
And why should our freedom of choice be denied?
What power does this government legitimately have when the product is safe to deny access to the American people to that product?
That is an oppressive government.
That is a tyrannical government.
Well, the FDA should be ashamed of itself.
Of all the things that they could prosecute, of all the people they could invest money in going after who are harming the American people, they choose an Amish farmer from Kinzers, Pennsylvania, with no criminal record, who's done nothing on his life but raise healthy cows.
They make him an enemy of the state.
What's wrong with this picture?
What is wrong with a government that does that?
How can we possibly stand in defense of a Food and Drug Administration that takes our tax dollars and devotes it in this way to ruin the life of a simple Amish farmer from Kinzer, Pennsylvania?
When you look at the government's complaint, the government goes after Dan not because he sold a contaminated product.
They go after him because his product was not pasteurized.
They have no proof that Dan's product was harmful.
All they have is proof that it didn't go through pasteurization.
There's a distinction.
Not every raw milk product is unsafe.
If that were the case, we probably wouldn't be here because our ancestors who drank it would be dead.
Now, when it comes to pasteurized milk, you know, pasteurized milk is not a panacea.
The government stands in the position that if the milk is pasteurized, it's safe to market.
Well, that's rubbish.
Every year in the United States, pasteurized milk, pasteurized cheese products based on pasteurized milk, is sold and is contaminated periodically and results in thousands of people becoming ill and people even dying from those products.
So, it's not the case that it is the mere presence of pasteurization that creates an iron wall of safety to protect the American consumer.
It is the case that the handling, the care, the testing of the product determines it's safe, whether it's sushi, whether it's raw milk, whether it's chicken, poultry, whether it's eggs.
Certainly there will be those who sell an unsafe product, but shouldn't the law focus like a laser beam and attack those individuals instead of condemning, honest, hard-working farmers in this country who've done nothing wrong, who pride themselves on the quality of their products?
What is it about this government, what is it about this Congress that it prefers the method of prior restraint, the assumption that everyone in a class is guilty until they're proven innocent?
This country is founded on the opposite proposition.
This country is founded on the proposition that we are innocent until proven guilty.
That we have a right to the fruits of our own labor.
That we have a right to intercourse with each other in the commercial marketplace, unobstructed, unmolested by an oppressive federal government.
We had a revolution in this country because of this kind of activity.
We have a right to demand protection for our liberty.
The use of a prior restraint, an unthinking mechanism by this federal government, is causing injury all right.
It's causing injury to these innocent farmers.
If they've sold a product that has not caused injury, what right does this government have in law or under our Constitution to condemn these individuals as if they were criminals selling contraband?
What right does a government have to do that?
Is it a government that makes the Statue of Freedom the pinnacle of the United States Capitol?
Does the Statue of Freedom mean anything in this country?
Is this a government that makes liberty paramount?
Or is this a government that makes regulation and the power of politics paramount to the individual liberty of the American people?
Now, not everyone is deaf.
Not everyone is deaf to our cries for justice.
Not everyone is deaf to the plight of the hard-working farmer, of the organic farmer in this country.
Not everyone is swept up in a majoritarian craze that will deny individuals the right to sell a safe product.
On May the 11th, Congressman Ron Paul introduced H.R. 1830.
The unpasteurized milk bill, which would prevent the Food and Drug Administration from barring the interstate sale of unpasteurized milk, leaving it with the power that it should have.
The power to go after those who sell unpasteurized milk or pasteurized milk that is unsafe.
But for those who make a clean product that is safe and uncontaminated, this bill will defend their right to sell it in the marketplace and the right of consumers to obtain it.
We must demand the passage of this bill to end FDA tyranny.
We must pass this bill to protect organic farming.
We must pass this bill to protect the rights of small farmers to bring their produce to market unmolested by agents of the federal government.
You know, Thomas Jefferson reminded us of something very important.
He said, all tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.
Do not remain silent.
Eternal vigilance is the price of our liberty in this country.
There are many instances where our rights are under siege in this nation.
And we must defend our rights.
We must restore a constitution of liberty in this country.
We must demand justice for Dan Algier.
We must demand an end to FDA tyranny.
We must demand a restoration of the original American constitution that founded this republic.
We must stop desecrating We're good to go.
We must demand that they stop desecrating this great statue of freedom, this basic defense of individual liberty.
We must restore the principle of liberty that led us to make that statue the pinnacle of the nation's capital.
Export Selection